Union Finance Minister Vishwanath Pratap Singh, for the first time in his life, found himself in the unenviable position of having to defend himself against corruption charges.

advertisement

.Prabhu Chawla

April 9, 2013

ISSUE DATE: September 30, 1986

UPDATED: February 12, 2014 12:29 IST

V.P. Singh

His political colleagues were envious of his clean image. Economic offenders and big businessmen cowered before the onslaught of his raiders. But last fortnight when Ravivar, a Calcutta-based Hindi weekly, carried an "expose" on alleged improprieties involving a trust fund managed by his family members, Union Finance Minister Vishwanath Pratap Singh, for the first time in his life, found himself in the unenviable position of having to defend himself against corruption charges.

The allegations made media headlines and the Lok Dal raised a ruckus in the Uttar Pradesh Vidhan Sabha. The finance minister responded by asking six prominent opposition leaders to investigate the allegations. His supporters attacked the article as an example of big business vendetta against him. Ravivar had featured Singh on its cover with a derisive caption depicting him as a dishonest politician who helped his family in making false claims to prevent their surplus land from being taken away under the Agricultural Land Ceilings Act.

Singh said: "I would have ignored the article. But what surprised me was the fact the magazine had earlier dropped it because they could not find anything against me. Both the editor and the correspondent told me this almost a year ago. I don't know what new facts they have collected now."

Said Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Bir Bahadur Singh: "I have gone through the records and I can declare that the finance minister has in no way influenced any of the government decisions." Anand Sharma, the Indian Youth Congress president, added: "Any attempt to defame the finance minister will not be tolerated. Tax evaders, smugglers and dishonest people are out to browbeat him by spreading canards." In fact, all the 223 Congress(I) MLA'S present in Lucknow on the day of discussion condemned the attack.

The controversy about Singh and the trust-the Daiya Charitable Society whose sole trustee is Singh's mother, Rani Brijraj Kumari - began over a year ago. Certain politicians from Allahabad, with representatives of a prominent industrial group from Kanpur and Calcutta, provided photostat copies of documents to journalists which purported to contain all the facts of the story.

"The magazine had earlier dropped the article because they could not find anything against me. I don't know what new facts they have collected now."V.P. Singh, finance minister

"We had the story for a few months but we wanted Singh's version so it was held up for a year," said Ravivar Editor Udayan Sharma. "Moreover, I don't see any reason for Singh being annoyed because nowhere in the story have we alleged that he was responsible for any violations and manipulations, and we have given his point of view as well. Had we not used it, others would have used it."

But the story, as written, showed Singh very poorly. The allegations were:

The trust, by inflating the number of trees on land that belonged to it and was later acquired by the Government, was able to claim an additional Rs 25 lakh in fraudulent compensation.

It was due to Singh's political clout that the case for the acquisition of surplus land and payment of compensation was not aggressively contested in court by the state Government. In order to prevent his own surplus land from being acquired by the state under the ceiling laws, Singh donated 3,041 big has to the trust.

Surprisingly, however, though the magazine published the allegations, it did not back them up with documented evidence. But Singh - scion of Maunda, a small princely state near Allahabad- was able to make a convincing case that no member of his immediate family could have stood to gain from the trust which was floated in 1954 when Singh had joined the Bhoodan movement. Singh was adopted by the Maunda family and inherited over 2,000 big has of fertile land, worth more than Rs 5 crore, which he donated to the Bhoodan movement. Singh says he had no right over the land owned by his original family so he decided to part with it. "Once I surrendered ownership of the land belonging to my real parents in favour of the Daiya trust, I forgot about it."

Government records show that the high court had upheld the legality and merits of the compensation claims made by the Daiya trust. The Ravivar story relates to the period of the Janata regime when allegations about the controversial tree count were first raised. In fact, after Singh became Uttar Pradesh chief minister, he ordered the state to contest the high court judgement. This was done but the Supreme Court upheld the lower court's ruling.

There is little doubt that through raids and prosecutions Singh has made many enemies, several of them in big business, who have been gunning for him. But that is the political price paid by any controversial minister. Stories like the one that appeared in Ravivar - whether deliberately aimed barbs or not-are the politician's lot. But even friends of the finance minister say that Singh, who is zealously protective of his Mr Clean image, may have over-reacted.

A story, they say, should have been treated-and rebutted-as a story. But in this case Singh has mounted what has, in effect, become a veritable campaign. The exercise could become counter-productive because the public will begin to wonder why the finance minister doth protest too much.

Get real-time alerts and all the news on your phone with the all-new India Today app. Download from